Is it possible to disable internal modules at startup, for example,
Hazelcast, to allow a faster boot of the app? I need this in development time.
Hazelcast can be easily disabled by the --nocluster command line option. There's no easy way to disable other services on command line - though most of them aren't started unless deployed applications need them.
When disabling Hazelcast, note that some services depend on it and wouldn't work. For example distributed CDI event bus, persistent timers, integrated JCache resources.
Related
I am looking for an options to execute recurring background tasks. The background Task would call the external REST GET request and update the status accordingly in the application database.
Which one of the following would be appropriate, considering that we do not like to maintain separate web.config between the application and the scheduler/task app. Looking for Simple option in .NET/Asp.NET web API context - not looking for any separate installation / 3rd party.
Scheduled task - believe we need to create those many scheduled tasks in a server which points to those many databases? maintainability is a concern?
windows service
Asp.Net background task options
any other better option?
Please provide your insights for this question.
I highly recommend looking at Hangfire to implement background tasks
This works better than a windows service in a cloud environment and supports fire-and-forget and repeat tasks/processing etc and integration is really seamless.
I just noticed your non-3rd party comment, not sure if you mean commercial component, but this is free, via nuget, if that helps?
see: https://www.hangfire.io
We have an environment with a vendor deployed application to several front ends on it. It makes heavy use of the ASP .Net storage (Session, Application, and Cache). Problem is with the load this environment quickly brings IIS to it's knees with the amount of data it's trying to keep in memory.
The solution we are trying to go with is to override the storage mechanism and implement our own. (Specifically a Redis server to manage the storage)
We have implemented their cache interface and set up Microsoft.Web.Redis.RedisSessionStateProvider in the web.config to manage the session. That part all works fine. The problem is that the caching inside the vendor application does not always use their provided interface. Decompiling the dll and examining dump files show that there are several instances of them directly calling (for example):
HttpContext.Current.Cache.Insert(...) and HttpContext.Current.Application[...] = ...
Is there any way we can override the HTTPContext* calls so that they'll use Redis to cache instead of the Asp .Net application storage?
When it is a "3rd" party which uses HttpContext.Current you probably have no chance to change that behavior.
Is this other application running within your context (do you control the app domain). Or is it a standalone application?
I once tried to change HttpContext.Current.Cache for unit testing and ended up mocking the whole HttpContext because it was so very internal somewhere in the Microsoft stack.
All this is pretty hard to do, not really recommended and can lead to all kinds of other errors.
In short, don't use HttpContext.Current.Cache. Use something you can inject.
In general, libraries should never use that static context.
It is much more flexible to have abstractions + DI for those kind of things...
For caching, you could use CacheManager for example.
We are referencing a 3rd party proprietary CLI DLL in our .net project. This DLL is only an interface to their proprietary C++ library. Our project is an asp.net (MVC4/Web API) web application.
The C++ unmanaged library is rather unstable. Sometimes it crashes with e.g. dangling pointers. We have no way of solving it, and using this library is a first-class customer requirement.
When the application crashes, the application pool in IIS doesn't respond anymore. We have to restart it, and doing so takes a couple minutes (yes, that long!).
We would like to keep this unstable DLL from crashing our application. What's the best way of doing it? Can we keep the CLI DLL in a separate AppDomain? How?
Thanks in advance.
I think every answer to this question will be some kind of work around.
My workaround would be to not interact directly with the DLL from your web application.
Instead write your requests from the web application to either a Message Queue or a SQL table. You can then have another application such as a Windows Service which reads the requests, interacts with the DLL and then writes the results back for your web application to read.
I'm not saying that SQL / Message Queues are the right way, I'm more thinking of the general process flow.
I had this exact problem with a third party library that accessed protected memory for purposes of interacting with a hardware copy protection dongle. It worked fine in a console or winforms app, but crashed like crazy when called from an IIS application.
We tried several different things, some of which are mentioned in other answers on this page. But ultimately, the best solution for us was to us a very old technology - .Net Remoting. I know - it's somewhat frowned on these days. But it fit this particular need quite well.
The unstable code was placed in a Windows Service application. The web application made remoting calls to this service, which relayed the commands to the third-party library.
Now I'm sure you could do the same thing with WCF, sockets, etc. But remoting was quick and easy to setup, and since we only talk to the same server it works without opening any ports. It just talks on a named pipe.
It does mean a second service to install besides the web application, but that was acceptable in my particular use case.
If you did something similar, and the third-party code actually crashed the service, you could probably write some code in your main application to bring it back up.
So perhaps a process boundary is more useful than an App Domain when you have unstable code to wrangle.
I would first increase the IIS process recyling rate, maybe the the DLL code fails after a certain number of calls, or after the process reaches a certain amount of memory usage.
You can find information on the configuration of IIS 7.0 recycling options here: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc753179(v=ws.10).aspx
In your case I would recycle the process at a specific time, when you know there is less load on the application. And after a certain number of requests (lower than the default) to try and have "fresh" process most of the time.
The recycling process is graceful in the sense that the the old process is not terminated until the one that will replace it is ready, so there should be no noticeable downtime.
More information about the recycling mechanism here: http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc745955.aspx
If the above does not solve the problem I would wrap the calls in my own code that manages the unstable DLL execution.
This code should recover from the failures for example by repeating the failing calls until a result is obtained and failing with a graceful error if it is not possible after a number of attempts.
Internally the calls to the unstable DLL could be made in a spawned thread or even the code could be in an new external executable that you could launch with Process.Start.
This last option has more overhead but it might be your only option. See this SO question for more information on this: How do you handle a thread that has a hung call?
I suggest following solution.
Wrap this dll with another web application. Can be one of the following ones. Since you already use web api, it is most suitable for you.
Simple ASMX Web Service
WCF Service
Asp.Net MVC - WEB Api Service
Control your p-invoke code so that you do not have any bug? See following articles.
The Black Art of P/Invoke and Marshaling in .NET
P/Invoke Revisited
Publish this application to IIS with different application pool.
Use standard techniques suggested before like. I suggest configure recycling IIS for both memory and scheduled times.
IIS process recycling rate
How to limit the memory used by an application in IIS?
I have a situation where information about a user is stored in the web application cache and when that information is updated in one application - I want to notify the other applications (running on the same machine) that the data should be removed from it's cache so it can be refreshed. Basically I need to keep cached data in sync across multiple asp.net applications.
I have started down the path of using a central web service to help coordinate the notifcations but it is turning out to be more complex than I think it needs to be.
Is there a way that one asp.net application can easily reach across to another on the same box to clear an item from the cache?
Is there a better way to achieve shared cached information than using the application cache?
I really want to create a way for apps to communicate in a loosely coupled way - I looked at nservice bus but the dependency on MSMQ scared me away - my client has had bad experiences with MSMQ and does not want to support an app that requires it.
Suggestions?
Michael
I agree with Hogan. Best is to use a shared database. I want to add to that that, when using SQL Server, you can use SQL Cache Dependency. This SQL Server mechanism allows notifications to applications in such a way that used caches can be invalided directly after a change is made to the data.
A shared database is probably going to cause you the least pain.
Edit
Note: ASP.NET allows you to make "cache clearing" triggers on SQL server changes. Should be a quick search in the cache examples on MSDN to find some examples. Thus when the user info stored in the cache changes in the DB the local cache copy will clear and be re-loaded from the DB.
There are commercial distributed caches available for .net other than Microsoft Velocity - NCache, Coherence, etc.
How about Velocity? It's a distributed cache that works between servers as well as between applications. It has PowerShell management and all sorts of documentation to get you going faster and be far more maintainable in the long-term.
What about COM/DCOM, using namespace System.Runtime.Remoting
I want to add a scheduled task to a client's ASP.NET app. These posts cover the idea well:
https://blog.stackoverflow.com/2008/07/easy-background-tasks-in-aspnet/
What is the Best Practice to Kick-off Maintenance Process on ASP.NET
"Out of Band" Processing Techiniques for asp.net applications
My question has two parts: First, will IIS unload the application if there isn't enough request activity despite the Cache activity? My client doesn't enjoy as much traffic as stackoverflow so they can't rely on user requests to keep the app 'active'. Obviously, I can't schedule tasks in an unloaded app.
Second, if so, is there a way to prevent IIS from unloading the app outside of configuration or external 'stay-alive' requests? My client's host doesn't allow much configuration tweaking and a stay-alive utility introduces the deployment complexity I'm trying to avoid with an ASP.NET Cache solution.
Thanks a bunch.
Edit/Conclusion: TheXenocide's solution is exactly correct given the question. However, I've decided it is a really bad question. The temptation to cut corners is always looming. I've regained my senses and told my client to use a website monitoring tool to keep the site active. In addition, the scheduled task is going in a windows service despite the extra deployment hassle.
Unfortunately, outside the range of changing timeout configuration (which I believe to be possible in Web.config, though I don't know what is and isn't allowed on hosting providers, most of which use Medium Trust) I don't believe there is any other method to keep the application from ending beyond web requests. One thing you might try that may be a little more simple than using some keep-alive service on a local machine might be to add some logic to Session_Start/Session_End that ensures there is always at least one session active; you can use the WebRequest class from within your application to call your own site and it should still start a new session.
Good luck, and let us know what you do :)
UPDATE: these details now very much depend on which version of IIS and which version of .NET you're running in. Newer versions of each have methods of configuring "always running" applications.